I agree completely.  I wish I could have stated it so clearly in my previous two posts.

Yes, agreed, although that last paragraph is pretty overwrought if you're implying that's what I believe.

But what can the federal government do about the cycle at the family level?  I think we share the same long term goals, but these goals cannot be achieved until we get broader conservative consensus in the country.

Practically speaking this issue is not central on my people's minds right now and it does not carry the urgency of Obamacare and the immediate harm the federal government is doing to our economy.  If we don't take care of those top priorities, we won't have a healthy economy tomorrow for today's "very poor" to aspire to join.

I think everyone is reading way too much into this.

I interpret the phrase "I'm not concerned about..." in the same sense as when somebody says "this doesn't concern you"; basically, that it's off-topic or irrelevant to the point at hand.  It seems like Romney just wanted to get off the sidetrack and back to his main idea about the middle class, and was merely trying to dismiss the topic. 

I think the vast majority of Americans support the nebulous idea of a "safety net" for the indigent and aren't gonna get real upset if he doesn't spend time figuring out how to fix the social programs for the "very poor".

So unless you want this election to actually be about the very poor and not about the Obamacare and the economy, I say quit needlessly beating up our own guy.

"Ok, I'm locked onto the Ayatollah's compound.  Which one fires missiles?"

"You're right. This national debt visualization software would never work in only 2D."

Mitt Romney nervously scans the area for "very poor people" despite his insistence that he's "not concerned" about them.

A gimme?

My first thought as well, except: If more men rode trains than women, instead of accommodating women's needs to entice women to ride more, the progressive solution would be to require an equal number of tickets be sold to women as to men, a la Title IX.  The trains, thus depleted of men, would run even more enormous deficits and require more public funding.

Sarah Palin has just gotten way too much uncritical glittering coverage from the fawning media.  It's about time someone tells the other side of the story.  You know, to bring some balance.  Let us know if she has any faults at all.

Be nice to him.  He meant to say corpseman (on two separate occasions!).  Wait, I mean, 10,000 people died in a tornado.  Or was it 57 states, one left to go?

Maybe he was just confused because the teleprompter was written in Austrian.

Does Mr. Charlotte have access to a forklift?

I agree with Aaron.  There's no way he could get the back wheels in with zero clearance in the front and rear.

I still get a pay wall.

Filibusters are for Democrats.

(Post Civil Rights-era, that is.)

It seems to be behind a paywall, unless I'm doing something wrong.

I got a 48, mainly because I scored low on the blue collar job-related questions.  And I've never lived outside a suburban area, but I have plenty of friends and relatives who grew up on farms, including my parents.